萨塞克斯公爵和其他公众人物在针对《每日邮报》和《星期日邮报》出版商的高等法院案件中败诉。
The Duke of Sussex and other public figures lost a High Court case against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.
约翰·汉德、海伦娜·威尔金森报道 萨塞克斯公爵和其他五位知名人士在针对《每日邮报》和《星期日邮报》出版商的隐私案件中败诉后，正寻求对高等法院的裁决提出上诉。
By John Hand, Helena Wilkinson The Duke of Sussex and five other high-profile figures who lost a privacy case against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday are seeking to challenge the High Court ruling.
哈里王子、歌手埃尔顿·约翰爵士和演员伊丽莎白·赫利等人在内的原告团体，面临需共同支付高达3450万英镑的法律费用，此前法院于7月裁定，他们未能证明关于非法收集信息的指控。
Prince Harry, singer Sir Elton John and actress Elizabeth Hurley were among the group facing paying joint legal costs of up to £34.5m after the court ruled in July they had failed to prove the allegations of unlawful information gathering.
《每日邮报》出版商联合报业有限公司强力否认这些指控。该案在伦敦经历了为期11周的审理，最终由尼克林法官驳回了所有指控。
Associated Newspapers Limited strongly denied the claims, which were heard at an 11-week trial in London that ended with judge Mr Justice Nicklin dismissing all the allegations.
当时，该出版商的一位发言人将该判决描述为“《每日邮报》及其记者的压倒性胜利”。
At the time, a spokesperson for the publisher described the judgement as an "overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists".
王子在民事听证会上亲自出庭作证，声称刊登在关于他的14篇文章中的细节“显然”证明记者们在窃听电话——但高等法院法官表示，他未能证明这一点。
The prince testified in person during the civil hearing and claimed the details that appeared in 14 articles about him "plainly" proved journalists were listening in to phone calls - but a High Court judge said he had failed to prove that.
周五，哈里王子、赫利、埃尔顿爵士、其丈夫大卫·弗尼什、演员萨迪·弗罗斯特和政治活动家劳伦斯女男爵的发言人表示，原告方已向上诉法院提交申请，请求许可对该等判决提出质疑。
On Friday, a spokesperson for Prince Harry, Hurley, Sir Elton, his husband David Furnish, actress Sadie Frost and political campaigner Baroness Lawrence said the claimants had filed applications with the Court of Appeal applying for permission to challenge the judgements.
声明称，计划中的上诉既针对尼克林法官驳回其主张的裁决，也针对随后作出的全额赔偿费用命令。
The statement said the planned appeal was both on Mr Justice Nicklin's dismissal of their claims and a subsequent indemnity costs order.
该发言人表示：“原告方恭敬地不同意这些前所未有的决定，认为它们在法律和事实上均存在缺陷。” 8月，在其判决作出一个月后，尼克林法官裁定，本案属于罕见情况，原告方应支付远超审前商定金额的费用。
The spokesperson said: "The claimants respectfully disagree with those unprecedented decisions, which they consider to be legally and factually flawed." In August, a month on from his judgement, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled that the case was a rare one in which the claimants should have to pay far in excess of the costs that had been agreed before the trial.
他当时还下令，在最终总额计算期间，申请人应先行支付 954 万英镑。
He also ordered at that time the claimants should make an initial payment of £9.54m while the final total was calculated.
该组织联合发言人的声明未提及参与此案的自由民主党政治家、爵士西蒙·休斯。BBC 已联系西蒙爵士，以确认他是否将参与上诉。
The statement from the group's joint spokesperson did not make any reference to Liberal Democrat politician Sir Simon Hughes who was part of the action. The BBC has contacted Sir Simon to establish whether he is joining the appeal.
在费用裁决作出后，他对 BBC 表示“失望”，并称将“花必要的时间考虑实体判决和费用判决，以及是否就其中一项判决或两项判决均提起上诉”。
After the costs ruling, he told the BBC he was "disappointed" and would take "the time necessary to consider both the substantive and the costs judgment and whether to pursue appeals against decisions in either judgment or both".
审判期间，多名《每日邮报》和《星期日邮报》的现任及前任记者、高管出庭作证，否认王子及其同案申请人的律师向他们提出的非法活动指控。
The trial saw many current and former Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists and executives giving evidence denying accusations of illegal activity that was put to them by lawyers representing the prince and his fellow claimants.
出版方律师在法庭上表示，这些记者提供了“令人信服的关于合法获取稿件来源模式的陈述”，包括使用朋友提供的信息，以及他们撰写对象周围“消息不保密”的社交圈子提供的信息。
Lawyers for the publisher said in court that the journalists had provided a "compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles", including using information provided by friends and "leaky" social circles surrounding those they had written about.
在这样一起民事案件中，法律惯例是败诉方必须偿还对方产生的“合理”法律费用。他们还必须自行承担自己的法律费用。
In a civil case such as this, the legal convention is that the losing party must reimburse "reasonable" legal fees incurred by the other side. They also have to settle their own legal costs.